Words, words, words . . .Operation 'Cast Lead'

The codewords some armed forces give their operations quite often suggest more about the purpose underlying them, even their tactics, strategies and objectives, than some military planners seem to be aware of.

I presume that is why the British, I am told by someone who has served in their armed forces, choose random words from a list which give away absolutely nothing, and simply go through them alphabetically until they reach Z. Operation Tellec, for example, instead of “Enduring Freedom’.

The method also has the advantage, of course, that in the event of a failure to achieve the objectives of the operation, or a defeat, some over-optimistic phrase does not come back to bite them, or some piece of wishful thinking does not forever become an object of derision or a subject for sarcasm in either the press or the history books like the American example quoted.

The Israeli military operation against the Palestinians of the Gaza Strip is called ‘Operation Cast Lead’.

Before you dismiss my contention that words may suggest more than appears at first sight and say “Well, yes, this is merely some gung-ho expression for producing lots of bullets to be fired at Hamas militants” in modern shot-towers in Tel Aviv, take a moment to recall the aftermath of the Israeli invasion of Southern Lebanon and what was left behind.

Apart from wholesale destruction, the IDF left behind large numbers of cluster bombs; banned now by virtually every country in the world except, of course, the two usual suspects who delight in leaving behind deadly traps for civilians when their optimistically-named operations go wrong and they are forced to withdraw. Or, as it used to be called before warfare was described as though it was a publicity stunt or an advertising campaign, a retreat.

“Cast lead”. Much of Israel’s most deadly bombs and shells are supplied by the US; it is almost as though the Pentagon uses Israel as a test bed to see what they can get away with next time. As we know from the first Gulf War, and other ‘operations’ (that word itself of course a mere euphemism for what used to be called ‘war’) lead shells are made from depleted uranium. Supposedly inert, or so the users have continually claimed, although there is plenty of evidence to suggest otherwise.

So, when the Israelis speak of ‘casting lead’, does not that now suggest to you that what will be cast over the ground and streets of the Gaza Strip (and no doubt its borders or city and town boundaries as they eventually withdraw) will be a great deal of lead armament? Which is likely to be lethal, one way or another, in both the short and very long terms?

My friend with military experience commented to me today that he has little doubt the Israelis have been using cluster bombs again. There will be, again, the protestations that many left behind were simply ‘defective’ and failed to explode, and therefore subsequent deaths and injuries which happen after the Israelis leave are merely unfortunate accidents. Just a little more ‘collateral damage’.

Yet it seems to me far more deliberate: is it not odd that so many of these ‘defective’ bomblets (designed to maim and injure as much as to kill) somehow do become effective again and explode weeks and months later?

As far as I remember, Israel has not signed the international treaty against the use of landmines. I understand they claim they do not use them. I forgot to ask my military friend if he happens to know what word the US uses for devices that work just like landmines but can plausibly be called something else. An ‘MRM’ perhaps: a “Movement Restricting Munition”. Perhaps, if he does know, he might not be able to tell me.

However, I cannot help feeling that in the months and years to come, we will find out if they come to light among the rest of the lead the Israelis so enthusiastically want to spread around the ground of Gaza.

What is it about some military minds that means they do not comprehend that words and phrases are not merely words, but convey concepts? And the concept behind these words is not just the spreading of death and destruction over the course of a week or two, but, one must suspect, for a decade or a generation.

(And, need I remind you, that Israel has nuclear weapons? Or that in late years there has been much American discussion on the tactical military use of small-scale nuclear weapons? Or that the two countries appear to follow each others' military dogmas? The last by-product of uranium is lead . . .Let us hope that the choice of these words does not imply that they are mulling over a tactical nuclear strike anywhere, too. But they suggest to me it is at least at the back of their minds and has taken at least some root in their military and political psychology.)